HT-2024-000316 - [2025] EWHC 434 (TCC)

The applicant (“BDW”) has made two applications for an order for information and documents (“information order”) pursuant to section 132 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (“the 2022 Act”) or alternatively section 37(1) of the Senior Courts Act or the inherent jurisdiction of the court. The first application, dated 13 December 2024, is against the first respondent (“ACL”). The second application, dated 3 February 2025, is against the second, third and fourth respondents (respectively, “R2”, “R3” and “R4”; collectively, “R2-4”).

The matter arises in this way. BDW, which is a subsidiary company of Barratt Developments PLC, was the developer of five relevant building projects that completed at various times between 1999 and 2005; these are known as (1) Crown Heights, (2) Explorers Court, (3) Pierhead Lock, (4) Galleria, and (5) Citiscape. (Footnote: ¹) On each of these projects BDW engaged ACL as the design and build contractor. Following the Grenfell Tower tragedy in 2017, fire safety defects and/or structural defects have been discovered in those five developments. BDW has accepted responsibility to the building owners and apartment owners and has agreed to meet the cost of necessary remedial works. BDW has notified ACL of claims in respect of the fire safety and structural defects at the five developments, on the basis that (i) the defects were caused by ACL’s breach of its duties under the Defective Premises Act 1972, in circumstances where the defects rendered the dwellings unfit for habitation when completed, and/or (ii) pursuant to the Civil Liability Contribution Act 1978 ACL is liable to make a contribution and/or to indemnify BDW in respect of the cost of remedial works. In one case, ACL’s liability was established in an adjudication award that has been paid and is not disputed (though ACL does dispute one of the bases of the award—see below). ACL disputes its liability in respect of the other four developments. In two cases, there are pending arbitration proceedings. In two cases, litigation in this court is at an early stage.

BDW has concluded, on the basis of ACL’s latest publicly available accounts, for the year ending September 2023, that ACL does not have the financial reserves to satisfy its alleged liabilities, which are estimated to be of the order of £85m in respect of the five developments. It therefore intends to apply for a building liability order under section 130 of the 2022 Act against entities “associated” with ACL within the meaning of section 131. By these applications it seeks the provision of information and documents to enable it to make, or consider making, an application under section 130.

ACL is a wholly owned subsidiary of R2. R2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of R3. R3 is a wholly owned subsidiary of R4, which is the ultimate parent company. R2 and R3 admit that they are associates of ACL for the purposes of sections 130 to 132 of the 2022 Act. R4, which was incorporated in June 2024, after BDW had informed the other respondents of its intention to apply for a building liability order, has not admitted that it is an associate of ACL¸ though BDW contends that it is.

In broad terms, the information sought by BDW relates to whether R4 is an associate of ACL, whether any other entities (including entities incorporated in the British Virgin Islands or in the Republic of Ireland) are associated with ACL, and up-to-date information on the financial positions of the respondents.

The applications are supported by the third, fourth and fifth witness statements of Mr Mark Pritchard, the solicitor with conduct of the application for BDW. In response the respondents rely on the witness statement of Mr Robert Goodship, the Head of Risk, Insurance & Compliance for Ardmore Group and a qualified solicitor. I have read those statements but do not think it necessary to recite their detailed contents in this judgment.

I am grateful for the written and oral submissions of Mr Rupert Choat KC and Mr Max Twivy for BDW, and for those of Mr Sean Brannigan KC and Mr Thomas Crangle for the respondents.